Gunwalker Update: Merida Initiative to Shift to Border Region, Multiple Gun Registration Broken Down Barney Style

Posted: August 20, 2011 by ShortTimer in Barack Obama, Corruption, Country Class, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Government, Guns, Individualism, Liberal Fascists, Obama administration, Operation Gunwalker, Second Amendment, underpants gnomes
Tags: , ,

Via Sipsey Street Irregulars, a story from Alternet news:

Dallas ATF special agent in charge Robert Champion traced today’s horrifying levels of violence not to Calderon’s deployment of the troops at the end of 2006, but to conflicts that broke out when the Zetas, former Mexican special forces soldiers turned enforcers for the Gulf Cartel, turned on the Gulf Cartel.

“That’s the genesis of where the violence began,” said Champion.

Since then, Champion said, gun running has evolved from being a solely a border issue to being an issue as far north of the border as Indianapolis, St. Paul, and Atlanta.

“We now have organized arms trafficking rings,” he said, adding that some of them use teenagers to smuggle weapons with the serial numbers erased.

The Merida Initiative was some $1.6 billion in US taxpayer money sent to Mexico to “fight the cartels”.  Given the incredibly corrupt nature of the Mexican govt., it’s done little but provide Ross Perot with another “giant sucking sound going south” example.  It started under the Bush administration, and was opposed by anyone who wasn’t a neocon or leftist, and the Obama administration has continued and expanded the release of funds to Mexico.

Mike Vanderboegh makes the point that the ATF is saying “the Zetas made us do it”, and that the “problem” as the ATF sees it, is that they don’t have enough power.  They need nationwide gun registration and tracking, not just for CA, AZ, NM, and TX.  Last night on Hannity, the point was made that the same people running drugs up north now run guns back down.  So even if there’s mandatory reporting of 2 or more long guns being sold in TX, the same guns bought in OK or MO or NH need to be reported as well.

The mandatory reporting basically means that if a federal firearms license holder sells 2 or more guns, they have to fill out a form telling the ATF the guns were sold.  Currently this is the case for multiple handgun sales.  This is the current form for handguns.

The reason that so many firearms advocates oppose this is that you’re informing the fedgov of what you’ve purchased.  The issue is that it isn’t the government’s business for several reasons.  The primary reason is that it turns into a national gun registry, and a national registry is a bad thing.  When the ATF starts keeping data on gun owners, that’s only a step away from taking them away.  For every brain-dead liberal who says “that can’t happen here, you’re a paranoid racist homophobe right-wing loon”, the fact is that registration precedes confiscation everywhere it’s been done.  Let’s not forget gun control is not about controlling inanimate objects, it’s about controlling people and the tools they use to defend their freedom.  Toyotomo Hideyoshi confiscated swords from his enemies (read: commoners) in Japan in 1588, Southern states like North Carolina have “pistol purchase permits” so that local authorities can deny black people (and in Onslow county, Marines) the right to own firearms, and historically, most all US gun control has been racist.

Note the quote here about the special laws and regulations.

This is an issue of ruling class vs country class, as is often the case.  To quote former Texas State Representative Dr. Suzanna Hupp:

How a politician stands on the Second Amendment tells you how he or she views you as an individual… as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of.

Regulations are restrictions, restrictions are infringements.  They are unconstitutional, and the reason they are unconstitutional is because the Founders knew that restrictions on the people lead to tyranny by govt.  They were very, very wise men.

Beyond just they tyranny aspect, there’s also the other problems of having firearms registered.  Since the govt. is terrible at maintaining individual privacy, you’re looking at a situation where your own firearms ownership could make your home a target for theft when you’re not there.  Or if you’re not a gun owner, the safety afforded when a thief doesn’t know you aren’t armed then turns into a certainty that you’re not.

As one final example of why it’s a bad thing, there already is a de-facto registration in many states.  If you want to actually CARRY your firearm for defense, in most states you need to petition the govt. for the priviledge of carrying and get a concealed carry permit.  Many people don’t want to share that information.  There’s no reason for thieves to know, there’s no reason for virulently anti-gun neighbors or people who’ve been conditioned into being hoplophobes to then attack you, and there’s no reason for violent ex-husbands to know where their ex-wives have moved to.

The insipid, violently anti-individual-rights goons who want everyone disarmed at Virginia’s Roanoke Times famously released the names and addresses of Virginians with concealed carry permits.  Their snarky “you shouldn’t have a gun” attitude was conveyed quite well in their article, which then finished with the list of VA CC holders.

I can hear the shocked indignation of gun-toters already: It’s nobody’s business but mine if I want to pack heat.

Au contraire. Because the government handles the permitting, it is everyone’s business.

There are good reasons the records are open to public scrutiny. People might like to know if their neighbors carry. Parents might like to know if a member of the car pool has a pistol in the glove box. Employers might like to know if employees are bringing weapons to the office.

And this is why government should not be handling any permitting or registration.  It is nobody’s business but yours.

People might like to know if their neighbors carry, but it’s none of their business.  People might like to know if their neighbors are 6th degree blackbelts or MMA fighters who could cripple them, too.  People might like to know if their neighbors are deviant sodomites who might corrupt their youth into becoming drag queens.  But none of that is any of their damn business – unless they want to actually talk to their neighbors.

This is not about being for or against guns. There are plenty of reasons people choose to carry weapons: fear of a violent ex-lover, concern about criminals or worry that the king of England might try to get into your house. There are plenty of reasons to question the wisdom of widespread gun ownership, too.

Now, the cretin at Roanoke is pretty much a dead horse in gun community circles, but it’s worth it to look at what he wrote.  First off, he suggests that fear of a violent ex lover is a good reason to carry… but then went on to post addresses of people who WERE LIVING IN FEAR OF VIOLENT EXES.  And he finishes with the snotty snark about the Revolutionary War.  He then dismisses the debate, but says there are reasons to question “the wisdom of widespread gun ownership”.

Really?  Widespread gun ownership means that individuals are exercising individual liberty.  Individuals who are autonomous human beings, each with their own lives, their own concerns, their own fears, their own hopes and dreams, and their own individual value and worth to themselves and their families.  Within your own life, you’re probably the number one person you look out for, even though you put a spouse/children/parents/family at the same level.  So why is your life and the lives of your loved ones less valuable when there are 10,000 individuals?  Are you viewed as a trustworthy and productive citizen, or as part of an unruly crowd that needs to be lorded over, controlled, supervised, and taken care of?

When the ATF proposes more regulations to your rights and your freedoms, and more regulations that were enshined in the rules that our government is ruled by (or it’s supposed to be when it’s not getting tyrannical), that’s all part of the problem.

Perhaps the greatest amount of offense here is that the ATF is demanding more regulations at a time when they are responsible for the gun violence in Mexico.  They have successfully wagged the dog, because the concept of the ATF’s staggering level of corruption is almost inconceivable.

The ATF actually watched crimes take place, they facilitated crimes taking place, and they were “giddy” when guns that they let walk turned up at crime scenes in Mexico.  The administration at higher levels knew about it, and is in the process of covering it up.  And all the while, they demand more power for the very agency that is the cause of this.

There’s no way that can work.  And there’s no way giving more power to an agency that ran guns is a good idea.  The political end that Congressman Issa talked about – that this could be a criminal act that the ATF was engaged in for the express purpose of demanding more power to fix the crisis they created, is the only logical explanation.  ATF agents who were not part of F&F who testified about it were dumbfounded by the idea that anyone would come up with it as a means of enforcement.  So the logical conclusion is that it wasn’t an enforcement tool.

How does a reporting tool for 2 long guns make a difference with regards to crime when the ATF watched Jaime Avila and his ring purchase hundreds, if not thousands of guns?  How does a reporting tool for 2 long guns make a difference with regards to crime when the ATF and the FBI collaborated to allow felons to buy guns, setting up the NICS background check so that felons could buy over 360 guns?  The law is that felons cannot buy guns.  Yet the ATF and FBI let them, and then let the guns go to Mexico.

They had the power to enforce the law, and yet instead totally ignored it and even assisted in the crime by allowing felons to buy guns.

What logical person would believe that a federal government agency that was BREAKING THE LAW in order to send guns into the hands of the Mexican drug cartels should be trusted with more authority?  They actively broke the laws they were supposed to enforce.  If we believe their story, the underpants gnomes make more sense.  If we believe the facts, we can see they were engaged in a criminal conspiracy between law enforcement agencies and criminal gangs to send guns to Mexico.

Given that they have just asked for more authority, we can surmise the reason why they would facilitate crime: Create a crisis, demand more power.

It’s no wonder ATF agents who aren’t JBTs and don’t want to be JBTs are so shocked.

  1. […] Registration is a very, very bad thing.  Broken down Barney-style here. […]

  2. […] regulations were mandated for southern border states, there was discussion of the same and other new gun control regs in August, it’s already been established that the White House knew, again the White House knew, and the […]

  3. […] A reminder of why registration is very, very bad for freedom in general. […]

  4. […] is the first step to confiscation.  Registration is a bad thing.  There is no reason for the government to know what you own or don’t own.  There is no […]

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s